Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Tamara Kronis

Conservative on Report Stage 2026-05-04

117 words · 4 sentences · 5 clauses

Replying to James Bezan (Conservative)

“Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Nanaimo—Ladysmith for her very strong speech, and for taking the time to actually review the testimony that we heard in committee and using that in her debate today on Bill C-11 now that we have closure on it. The Liberals continually use the Arbour report as their shield and explanation for why they are plowing ahead with these changes, which military justice experts and veterans are saying they do not want. The interesting fact is that the committee heard from the very survivors of military sexual trauma, who also talked to Justice Arbour. It was discovered that over the last five years, since they brought choice into the system and things were moved to the civilian system, they were not receiving justice because of the Jordan framework and the higher thresholds to prosecute. At the end of the day, there was no accountability in the chain of command. Could my colleague please comment on that, as well?”

Statement grade

Average 64 / 100

A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.

Anecdote 35%Claims 29%Positioning 19%Reasoning 17%

This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.

Mr. Speaker, Anecdote · 41 wordsI had the privilege, before I was elected to this place, of being able to work with Madam Justice Arbour for a year when I worked at the ICTY in The Hague.¹ I know the kind of work that she does.Anecdote Claims · 34 wordsThere is no doubt in my mind that the work she did and the report she provided allowed our military to make progress with respect to the issues that are addressed in this bill. Positioning · 22 wordsI only wish that the defence minister had taken the time to listen to people the way that Madam Justice Arbour does, PositioningReasoning · 20 wordsand possibly to consult with her so that we could have avoided the mistakes that were made with this bill.Partly on pointHidden agency

At a glance

Lost points for
Didn't answerNone of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.
Little substanceMuch of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 41

3 of 9 deductions are Signal

Signal checks whether every part makes a point, gives a reason, or asks for action. A low score means the speaker filled time with fluff, pleasantries, or attacks.

A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “I had the privilege, before I was elected to this place, of being able to work with Madam Justice Arbour for a year when I worked at the ICTY in The Hague.”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “I know the kind of work that she does.”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “I only wish that the defence minister had taken the time to listen to people the way that Madam Justice Arbour does,”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 46

5 of 9 deductions are Relevance

Relevance checks whether the speaker stays on topic and answers the question asked. A low score means the speaker dodged the issue. Measured against the point put to the member, and the bill under debate.

Staying near the subject without addressing the matter at hand: what was asked, or what the bill, motion or speech is about.What the tags mean “I had the privilege, before I was elected to this place, of being able to work with Madam Justice Arbour for a year when I worked at the ICTY in The Hague.”About the speaker’s past work with Justice Arbour, not the survivors’ testimony asked about.
Staying near the subject without addressing the matter at hand: what was asked, or what the bill, motion or speech is about.What the tags mean “I know the kind of work that she does.”A general remark about Arbour’s work, not the point raised.
Staying near the subject without addressing the matter at hand: what was asked, or what the bill, motion or speech is about.What the tags mean “There is no doubt in my mind that the work she did and the report she provided allowed our military to make progress with respect to the issues that are addressed in this bill.”Praises the Arbour report’s contribution to the bill’s subject but does not address the testimony about the civilian system and accountability.
Staying near the subject without addressing the matter at hand: what was asked, or what the bill, motion or speech is about.What the tags mean “I only wish that the defence minister had taken the time to listen to people the way that Madam Justice Arbour does,”Criticizes the defence minister’s listening, not the question about survivors’ experience in the civilian system.
Staying near the subject without addressing the matter at hand: what was asked, or what the bill, motion or speech is about.What the tags mean “and possibly to consult with her so that we could have avoided the mistakes that were made with this bill.”About consultation and mistakes with the bill, not the accountability concern put to the member.

Respect · 100

0 of 9 deductions are Respect

Respect checks whether the speaker argued with people’s positions and records rather than attacking the people: insults, mockery, or bad motives assigned to them. Criticism of what someone did, however strong, is not marked.

Nothing lost points.

Clarity · 70

1 of 9 deductions are Clarity

Clarity checks for plain speaking, clear ownership of actions, and honest limits on certainty. A low score means vague promises or evasive language.

Wording that hides who did something, or who will.What the tags mean “the mistakes that were made”The passive names no one as responsible for the mistakes, leaving the actor hidden.

Claims · 1

This list shows the factual statements you can check for yourself: the words as said, and the claim restated to stand on its own.

1“I had the privilege, before I was elected to this place, of being able to work with Madam Justice Arbour for a year when I worked at the ICTY in The Hague”Before being elected to Parliament, Tamara Kronis worked at the ICTY in The Hague for a year alongside Justice Louise Arbour.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20